Construction Zone Car Crash

From the Desk of Adam K. Levin, Esq. (auto accident attorney/truck accident lawyer)

Mavrich v. Penn DOT and Golden Triangle Construction Co., Inc., (C.P. Beaver Cty. Nov. 30, 2009).

Judge Kwidis of the Court of Common Pleas of Beaver County, Pennsylvania, denied the Motion for Summary Judgment filed by a construction company performing road work on a state highway and allowed a Pennsylvania car crash victim to proceed to a jury trial. In this case, the plaintiff driver approached an intersection in Aliquippa, Pennsylvania, which was under construction. As the driver approached the intersection, the right lane was closed and the plaintiff swerved abruptly to his left to avoid a collision with the construction barrels and directional arrow in the closed right lane of traffic. As a result of taking evasive action, the plaintiff’s vehicle veered up and over the concrete median in the center of the four lane road. His gas tank was ruptured and flames engulfed the vehicle. The plaintiff sustained 2nd and 3rd degree burns covering 35% of his body, necessitating three separate surgeries.

The plaintiff filed a lawsuit against PennDOT and the construction company performing work on the site. The plaintiff alleged that the defendant created a dangerous condition by not adequately warning drivers of potential dangers within the construction site, i.e. the right lane closure and the damaged median. Judge Kwidis ruled that issues of fact exist as to whether the construction company should have erected signs warning drivers of the disrepair of the concrete median and the right lane closure and that the case should therefore be decided by a jury concerning the need for appropriate warning signs.

The auto accident lawyers and truck accident lawyers at Liever, Hyman & Potter, P.C., handle cases just like this as a regular part of our practice in Berks County, PA.

Latest Posts